Posted on 12/31/2013 12:03:43 PM PST by Samuccaya777
Yes, welcome to FR. You posted a great article. Now, build on that by talking to us....
Why do NORMAL people breathe?
A: -to stay ALIVE.
Same reason.
The lying scumbags seem to always win, even in something as outrageously unconstitutional as the 0bamacare decision by Justice Roberts.
Don’t forget, their noble lies, said with a lisp.
Devil DBA Barrack Hussein Obama. Nuclear proliferators are devils. You can add John Kerry and Bill Clinton to the devil list due to being nuclear proliferators.
They haven’t refreshed their language.
goes back to paraphrasing Mr. President.
“Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they’re ignorant; it’s just that they know so much that isn’t so.” “
Because there are few, if any conservatives or GOP who have a testicle between them to stand up to these lies. They’ll call us racist, homophobe, etc and we don’t have the numbers to impeach or anything else. March quietly into those gas chambers then and don’t waste what time we have left complaining about what has been allowed to happen through the stupidity and indifference of what should be open and active opposition to this regime.
Because they don’t gave a clue what they are talking about. They operate on knee jerk ideals that makes them sound compassionate and gives them a cause. Unfortunately, it rarely works and is never thought out. OBAMACARE is the precise example of their ideology.
since the time of Walter Cronkite, the man who stabbed American armed forces in the back during the TET offensive in Vietnam, when we actually had a chance of winning the war, except for his lie to the American public at that time, a lie that shaped history
Machiavelli. the end justifies the means
Is this a real question? No offense to the author but are you serious? Have you been under a rock for the past 100 years?
THEY LIE BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO.
If they told the truth they would be running for Canada covered in tar and feathers.
if you believe what you are doing is good and just, there is no reason to lie about it. Thus I’m sure these people know what they are all about is wrong, bad, hurtful.
BTTT
If they told the truth, they would be shunned. Leftists must lie to survive.
because the press covers for them, and idiots believe it, and vote democRAT
Liberals lie because they need to buttress their concept of utopia.
Rather than being grounded in reality, which accepts the fact that man is flawed and needs God, liberals put their faith in a godless, utopian, Marxist concept of humanity: man is perfectible in his own right.
This ideology leads to a “the ends justify the means” way of thinking, and lying is simply a way of getting to the ends.
You are right but I think the others are just servants of the devil Obama is the real thing he has done more damage to this country in such a short time..Clinton was to busy pulling his pants down..Kerry is big fool that go this job just because he is rich and dumb..
Obviously, the Susan Rice interview with Lesley Stahl on CBS 60 Minutes December 22, 2013 does not represent true journalism.Incorrect.
It does show the astounding level of insouciance that has pervaded the leftist political hemisphere and their lackeys in the liberal news media when they feel they can roll one lie out right after anotherObviously true. How can the first assertion be false and the second assertion be true? Simple - the conceit of journalistic objectivity is humbug. Always has been, always will be. Journalism is naturally partisan.But then, before the Civil War era the various newspapers were much more variegated in their opinions, and much more open about the fact that any given newspaper was about the opinions of its printer. Back then, newspapers notoriously didn’t agree about much of anything. In that milieu, readers were not under any illusion that journalists were objective.
What changed that? IMHO it was the advent of the telegraph - the telegraph, and the wire services. Any wire service would tend to homogenize the newspapers which belong to it; the Associated Press happens to have been an aggressively monopolistic and successful wire service which quickly became dominant in the US. In the second half of the Nineteenth Century the concentration of propaganda power which the AP represented became an issue.
The AP responded to that challenge to its legitimacy by claiming that, since its member newspapers (which represented the source of much of its content) didn’t agree about much of anything, the AP itself was objective. It was a convenient argument, and it seemed to have some sense behind it - but the homogenizing effect of the AP promptly put paid to any validity it might initially have had. Not only did the AP inherently tend to homogenize its member newspapers, the AP created its “Stylebook” for that explicit purpose. The stylebook had a legitimate influence in sharpening the writing in newspapers, but it also has provisions which have patent political implications.
So the conceit of journalistic objectivity derives from the very mechanism - the AP - which most signally assured that journalism would speak with a single voice. Thus, uniformity is put forward as ersatz “objectivity.”
The natural disposition is always to believe. It is acquired wisdom and experience only that teach incredulity, and they very seldom teach it enough. The wisest and most cautious of us all frequently gives credit to stories which he himself is afterwards both ashamed and astonished that he could possibly think of believing.Thus, we find ourselves afflicted with a monolithic journalism which never has to take responsibility for the validity of its favored nostrums, and which is determined to lead the way in irresponsibility. Worse, we find ourselves afflicted by an electorate which is loaded with people who are predisposed to believe and follow irresponsible journalism.The man whom we believe is necessarily, in the things concerning which we believe him, our leader and director, and we look up to him with a certain degree of esteem and respect. But as from admiring other people we come to wish to be admired ourselves; so from being led and directed by other people we learn to wish to become ourselves leaders and directors. And as we cannot always be satisfied merely with being admired, unless we can at the same time persuade ourselves that we are in some degree really worthy of admiration; so we cannot always be satisfied merely with being believed, unless we are at the same time conscious that we are really worthy of belief. As the desire of praise and that of praise-worthiness, though very much a-kin, are yet distinct and separate desires; so the desire of being believed and that of being worthy of belief, though very much a-kin too, are equally distinct and separate desires.
The desire of being believed, the desire of persuading, of leading and directing other people, seems to be one of the strongest of all our natural desires. - Adam Smith, Theory of Moral Sentiments
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.